9/11 What really happened to WT7?

Started by Fuzzman, September 28, 2016, 04:32:04 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Eamonnca1

Quote from: Baile an tuaigh on September 12, 2018, 01:49:50 AM
Building 7 was not hit by any plane.
The Fire commander leading the fight on the day, said that "the fires in WTC 7 were under control and only needed 2 teams to put it out". He called for the area command to assign the teams to fight the fire. They started to put the fires out, only to be told after half an hour to abandon their positions, and evacuate the building. They argued with the commanders that the fires were almost out, but the commanders radioed they had to evacuate immediately as the building was going to collapse and trap them in it. They radioed back saying they (The commanders) were talking rubbish as there was very little damage to the building and there was no way a collapse was imminent. They were then told not to argue but to evacuate immediately. Leave everything, run. About 5 minutes after evacuating the building it collapsed symmetrically to the ground into it's own footprint.
There are dozens of videos on YTube where firemen talk about what they heard and saw, as they evacuated the building. They describe hearing dozens of explosions from the top of the building on every floor all the way to the bottom. They also describe these explosions as exactly like a demolition.
None of this was ever mentioned in the NIST reports, where they completely ignored any and all testimony regarding explosions, not just in building seven but WTC 1 and 2.

As for the assertion that  multiple structural steel support beams were sheered by an Aluminum can, I guess we will never know because the evidence of what happened to the steel was never gathered due to the steel being removed immediately from the scene of the crime. Removal of evidence from a crime scene is a capital offence btw. Coverup anyone....

Building 7 was hit by debris from the collapse of the north tower and the cause of its collapse is well documented and understood.

Your crazy description makes it sound like even commanders in the NY fire department were in on the conspiracy. It'd be easier for you tinfoil hat-wearing people to list who you think is not involved.

Jell 0 Biafra

Quote from: omaghjoe on September 13, 2018, 07:13:36 PM
Quote from: Jell 0 Biafra on September 13, 2018, 05:39:30 PM
Quote from: J70 on September 13, 2018, 05:32:41 PM
Quote from: Jell 0 Biafra on September 13, 2018, 05:18:39 PM
Quote from: Hardy on September 13, 2018, 04:32:17 PM
Quote from: Jell 0 Biafra on September 13, 2018, 02:36:28 PM
Quote from: trailer on September 13, 2018, 01:57:22 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on September 13, 2018, 01:38:12 PM
Quote from: Snapchap on September 13, 2018, 10:59:57 AM
Quote from: trailer on September 12, 2018, 11:26:17 AM
Quote from: Dire Ear on September 12, 2018, 11:14:40 AM
Quote from: trailer on September 12, 2018, 10:28:57 AM
Quote from: Baile an tuaigh on September 12, 2018, 01:49:50 AM
Building 7 was not hit by any plane.
The Fire commander leading the fight on the day, said that "the fires in WTC 7 were under control and only needed 2 teams to put it out". He called for the area command to assign the teams to fight the fire. They started to put the fires out, only to be told after half an hour to abandon their positions, and evacuate the building. They argued with the commanders that the fires were almost out, but the commanders radioed they had to evacuate immediately as the building was going to collapse and trap them in it. They radioed back saying they (The commanders) were talking rubbish as there was very little damage to the building and there was no way a collapse was imminent. They were then told not to argue but to evacuate immediately. Leave everything, run. About 5 minutes after evacuating the building it collapsed symmetrically to the ground into it's own footprint.
There are dozens of videos on YTube where firemen talk about what they heard and saw, as they evacuated the building. They describe hearing dozens of explosions from the top of the building on every floor all the way to the bottom. They also describe these explosions as exactly like a demolition.
None of this was ever mentioned in the NIST reports, where they completely ignored any and all testimony regarding explosions, not just in building seven but WTC 1 and 2.

As for the assertion that  multiple structural steel support beams were sheered by an Aluminum can, I guess we will never know because the evidence of what happened to the steel was never gathered due to the steel being removed immediately from the scene of the crime. Removal of evidence from a crime scene is a capital offence btw. Coverup anyone....

This is just f**king bananas. Take a break from the internet lad.
Don't think it's that far-fetched myself

Saying that the American government blew up Building 7 is not far fetched? You're on a level with Willie Frazier and Jim Corr. Good company.

Worth noting that Willie Frazer (among plenty of others) maintained that state collusion was a conspiracy theory. There are still those who would accuse you of mad conspiracy theories for suggesting that the British State orchestrated the slaughter of innocent civilians in Dublin & Monaghan in May 1974, for instance.

I'm not suggesting I necessarily believe the 9/11 conspiracy theories, but if the world was made up solely of people who sneered at every seemingly outlandish conspiracy theory, it would be a dangerous world where states could get away with a lot more than what we already now know they have been up to.

Exactly. It's like Bush said once, telling people not to believe these conspiracy theories... You're either with us or you're with the terrorists. So you're not a proper American if you question 9/11. Clever propaganda line.

Can anyone name one outlandish conspiracy theory that was sneered at and has since been proven true?


I don't know how outlandish conspiracies have to be to qualify, but there was the gulf of Tonkin incident, in which US government officials knowingly deceived the public leading to the Vietnam war.  https://www.usni.org/magazines/navalhistory/2008-02/truth-about-tonkin   And for both the Gulf war and the Iraq war, there were orchestrated attempts to deceive the public about the need to go to war. 
When people in power collude secretly to achieve aims that are not in the public interest, what is that only a conspiracy?

Yes - a REAL conspiracy. What is your point?

Simply that the claim that a democratically elected government would knowingly lead its people into war under false premises is/has been regarded as a conspiracy theory.  So they're examples of conspiracy theories that turned out to be true.

To be regarded as a conspiracy theory, does the quality of the supporting evidence not matter?

I've never heard anyone saying that the contemporary claims that the Bush administration, with the assistance of the Blair government, was cooking the books/data to garner support in the run-up to the Iraq War, amounted to a conspiracy theory.

Maybe Bush and Blair were too nakedly fraudulent?

stew, god bless him (whatever happened to him?) used to roll out the Hillary conspiracy theories all the time, often to do with her murdering people, without a shred of supporting evidence.

To me, a conspiracy theory is where someone posits some outlandish explanation for something without offering any evidence beyond some poorly thought-through/half-baked, paranoid nonsense.

Fair enough.  Given that definition, I don't know of any ones that have turned out to be true.  But I wonder if everyone is working with something like your definition.

  If I told a group of people right now that the Gulf war was sold to the American people by a PR company who showcased a woman who claimed to have seen Iraqi soldiers in Kuwait shut off incubators containing babies, and that woman turned out to be the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to the US, and that her story was entirely made up, I would be fairly sure some would dismiss it as a conspiracy theory.

Is the conspiracy surrounding the WTC in 2001 also related to the motivation for the first Gulf War 10 years previous?

I wouldn't think so.  The conspiracy about the first gulf war is established fact. I don't see any evidence for the WTC conspiracy.

BennyCake

Quote from: Eamonnca1 on September 13, 2018, 07:22:59 PM
Quote from: Baile an tuaigh on September 12, 2018, 01:49:50 AM
Building 7 was not hit by any plane.
The Fire commander leading the fight on the day, said that "the fires in WTC 7 were under control and only needed 2 teams to put it out". He called for the area command to assign the teams to fight the fire. They started to put the fires out, only to be told after half an hour to abandon their positions, and evacuate the building. They argued with the commanders that the fires were almost out, but the commanders radioed they had to evacuate immediately as the building was going to collapse and trap them in it. They radioed back saying they (The commanders) were talking rubbish as there was very little damage to the building and there was no way a collapse was imminent. They were then told not to argue but to evacuate immediately. Leave everything, run. About 5 minutes after evacuating the building it collapsed symmetrically to the ground into it's own footprint.
There are dozens of videos on YTube where firemen talk about what they heard and saw, as they evacuated the building. They describe hearing dozens of explosions from the top of the building on every floor all the way to the bottom. They also describe these explosions as exactly like a demolition.
None of this was ever mentioned in the NIST reports, where they completely ignored any and all testimony regarding explosions, not just in building seven but WTC 1 and 2.

As for the assertion that  multiple structural steel support beams were sheered by an Aluminum can, I guess we will never know because the evidence of what happened to the steel was never gathered due to the steel being removed immediately from the scene of the crime. Removal of evidence from a crime scene is a capital offence btw. Coverup anyone....

Building 7 was hit by debris from the collapse of the north tower and the cause of its collapse is well documented and understood.

Your crazy description makes it sound like even commanders in the NY fire department were in on the conspiracy. It'd be easier for you tinfoil hat-wearing people to list who you think is not involved.

Debris, eh? Fires, eh?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cK2TTl6LAnk

dec

Quote from: BennyCake on September 14, 2018, 01:30:20 PM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on September 13, 2018, 07:22:59 PM
Quote from: Baile an tuaigh on September 12, 2018, 01:49:50 AM
Building 7 was not hit by any plane.
The Fire commander leading the fight on the day, said that "the fires in WTC 7 were under control and only needed 2 teams to put it out". He called for the area command to assign the teams to fight the fire. They started to put the fires out, only to be told after half an hour to abandon their positions, and evacuate the building. They argued with the commanders that the fires were almost out, but the commanders radioed they had to evacuate immediately as the building was going to collapse and trap them in it. They radioed back saying they (The commanders) were talking rubbish as there was very little damage to the building and there was no way a collapse was imminent. They were then told not to argue but to evacuate immediately. Leave everything, run. About 5 minutes after evacuating the building it collapsed symmetrically to the ground into it's own footprint.
There are dozens of videos on YTube where firemen talk about what they heard and saw, as they evacuated the building. They describe hearing dozens of explosions from the top of the building on every floor all the way to the bottom. They also describe these explosions as exactly like a demolition.
None of this was ever mentioned in the NIST reports, where they completely ignored any and all testimony regarding explosions, not just in building seven but WTC 1 and 2.

As for the assertion that  multiple structural steel support beams were sheered by an Aluminum can, I guess we will never know because the evidence of what happened to the steel was never gathered due to the steel being removed immediately from the scene of the crime. Removal of evidence from a crime scene is a capital offence btw. Coverup anyone....

Building 7 was hit by debris from the collapse of the north tower and the cause of its collapse is well documented and understood.

Your crazy description makes it sound like even commanders in the NY fire department were in on the conspiracy. It'd be easier for you tinfoil hat-wearing people to list who you think is not involved.

Debris, eh? Fires, eh?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cK2TTl6LAnk


The guy who made the fake video explains how he did it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8VAsoVuShM

Keyser soze

Bennycake you should change your first name to Fruit.  ;D

BennyCake

A building doesn't fall into it's own footprint unless it's been wired with explosives.

trailer

Quote from: BennyCake on September 14, 2018, 03:04:59 PM
A building doesn't fall into it's own footprint unless it's been wired with explosives.

What about Primark in Belfast? Suppose it was wired with explosives?

dec

#172
Quote from: BennyCake on September 14, 2018, 03:04:59 PM
A building doesn't fall into it's own footprint unless it's been wired with explosives.

The towers didn't collapse in their own footprint


J70

Quote from: BennyCake on September 14, 2018, 03:04:59 PM
A building doesn't fall into it's own footprint unless it's been wired with explosives.

Que?? ???


Eamonnca1

In other news, an iceberg didn't sink the Titanic. When was the last time you were able to put a dent in a steel plate using an ice cube from your freezer?

Tony Baloney

Quote from: Keyser soze on September 14, 2018, 02:26:13 PM
Bennycake you should change your first name to Fruit.  ;D
Good work there sir.

give her dixie

A long but very worthwhile read

9/11 Revisited: Declassified FBI Files Reveal New Details About 'The Five Israelis'

Editor's Note: The story of the Dancing Israelis remains one of the most controversial and explosive untold stories of Sept. 11, 2001. Previous efforts to analyze this aspect of 9/11 have been mostly emotive OpEds and conspiratorial rants – until now. Writer Greg Fernandez presents some new declassified FBI material as part of a newly compiled and highly detailed account of this chilling chapter in the 21st century's most iconic event

https://21stcenturywire.com/2015/09/11/911-revisited-declassified-fbi-files-reveal-new-details-about-the-five-israelis/

Some other links

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rStJ5BgadPs

I can understand this article as not long after I returned in '06 from backpacking in South America, and having encountered many Israelis, I had a knock on my door in Dungannon from an Israeli selling art pieces. When I asked my neighbours if they had been approached, they said no.

https://www.salon.com/2002/05/07/students/

Asked tonight what the attack meant for relations between the United States and Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, the former prime minister, replied, ''It's very good.'' Then he edited himself: ''Well, not very good, but it will generate immediate sympathy.'' He predicted that the attack would ''strengthen the bond between our two peoples, because we've experienced terror over so many decades, but the United States has now experienced a massive hemorrhaging of terror.''

https://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/12/us/day-terror-israelis-spilled-blood-seen-bond-that-draws-2-nations-closer.html
next stop, September 10, for number 4......


give her dixie

#179
next stop, September 10, for number 4......